RABEL alias RABO alias SIKANDAR vs THE STATE
This matter concerns an application for post-arrest bail filed by the applicant, Rabel alias Rabo alias Sikandar, who was accused in F.I.R. No. 63 of 2006 for an offence under the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance. The core legal questions were whether the applicant was entitled to bail based on the principle of consistency, given that a co-accused had already been granted bail, and whether the applicant's status as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance warranted the concession of bail. The Court observed that the co-accused, Bashir Ahmed, had previously been granted bail on similar grounds and that the State counsel did not oppose the application. Consequently, the Court held that the applicant was entitled to the relief sought. The decision reinforces the principle of consistency in bail matters, where co-accused persons on similar footings should generally be treated alike, and acknowledges the statutory protections afforded to juvenile offenders regarding the grant of bail.
- Is a juvenile accused entitled to the concession of bail under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance?
- Does the principle of consistency apply when a co-accused has already been granted bail in the same case?
- Can bail be granted when the State counsel does not oppose the application?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 498, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 7, Juvenile Justice System Ordinance 2000
- Section 11, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' FARRUKH ZIA G. SHAIKH, J--Applicant Rabel alias Rabo alias Sikandar son of Anwar Ali by caste Soomro has filed this application under sections 497/498, Cr.P.C. r/w section 7 of Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, seeking post-arrest bail, who is required in F.I.R. Crime No,63 of 2006 registered at Police Station, Bhiria, District Naushahro Feroze for an offence under sections 11/16 Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood Ordinance).
2. ' Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Junejo, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, has argued that co-accused Bashir Ahmed, has already been granted bail before arrest by this Court vide order dated 9-10-2006 and the case of the present applicant is also on same footing; that the name of the applicant is not disclosed in the F.I.R. But the same only appears in 164, Cr.P.C.
3. Statement of the abductee Mst. Sumera; that at the time of incident, the applicant was 16 years of age and has remained in Jail since about two years; that the applicant being juvenile, is entitled to the concession of bail as his case comes within the ambit of section 7(a) of Juvenile Justice System Ordinance.
4. ' Mr. Ghulam Sarwar Korai, learned counsel appearing for the State, has frankly conceded to the grant of bail on the ground that on the same footing co-accused Bashir Ahmed has been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court, therefore, he has no objection if the present applicant is enlarged on bail.
5. ' Keeping in view the above position, the applicant Rabel alias Rabo alias Sikander is granted bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,100,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
6. ' Application stands disposed of.